MemoryDealers.com founder Roger Ver abuses admin access at Blockchain.info

[CharlieContent]

If someone did a mistake and added to your real bank account even 1$, i say it again BY MISTAKE, would you give it back? Tell the truth here.

Of course I would, and I think most people would. Unless someone was very short of money, in which case I think a lot of people would be tempted to keep it.

i understand that my reaction wasn't honest, what in this world is honest after all.

Hahaha. I love this. I want to see some more people come out and say this.

Pirate: "Yes, it was a ponzi scheme....but what in this world is honest, after all?"

Bruce Wagner: "Yes I did run MyBitcoin....but who in this world didn't think I was a sleazy scumbag from the beginning, after all?"

Zhou Tong: "There was no Chinese relic dealer...but who in this world is genuinely a relic dealer, after all?"

AugustoCroppo: "Yes, I don't have a wife....but who in this world would marry me, after all?"

[1715560451]

1715560451

[nethead]

If someone did a mistake and added to your real bank account even 1$, i say it again BY MISTAKE, would you give it back? Tell the truth here.

Of course I would, and I think most people would. Unless someone was very short of money, in which case I think a lot of people would be tempted to keep it.

i understand that my reaction wasn't honest, what in this world is honest after all.

Hahaha. I love this. I want to see some more people come out and say this.

Pirate: "Yes, it was a ponzi scheme....but what in this world is honest, after all?"

Bruce Wagner: "Yes I did run MyBitcoin....but who in this world didn't think I was a sleazy scumbag from the beginning, after all?"

Zhou Tong: "There was no Chinese relic dealer...but who in this world is genuinely a relic dealer, after all?"

AugustoCroppo: "Yes, I don't have a wife....but who in this world would marry me, after all?"

I do not believe that im in the same position as them but a truth have been told there

[Rob E]

I wonder how many whiners wouldn't have done the exact same thing if it happened to themselves.. this thread would be fkn dead. Its alright to bitch and whine about it, then it happens to them and suddenly the shoe is on the other foot! Right charlie? EH? ..El 0hl..

Rob, honestly, if this happened to me I would not give a shit. It's simply not worth my time to worry about fifty measly bucks if it was my mistake in the first place. I'd just chalk it up to experience, exactly like I said.

For Roger to make such a big deal over $50, he must be in financial trouble. Either that or he's completely insane. I think the latter is more likely, but who knows.

Rob, your first language isn't English, is it? Please tell me it isn't.

I'm all for going after the guy

The whole Blockchain.info thing aside, don't you think it's completely unprofessional for Roger to publish the guy's address on a forum? I'm not saying it's morally wrong, I'm saying it's inappropriate. After all, this guy didn't scam Roger. He just kept the wrong change. To me it amounts to a customer service dispute, really.

What kind of company solves a customer service dispute by posting the customer's address on a forum for the sake of fifty bucks? One run by completely immature amateurs, in my opinion.

Yes you would 've, stop lying.

the only imature amateur on here i see on here.. so far .. is you.

[SgtSpike]

All you who say you would return back the money i simply cant believe you. Replace that "somene" with "someone you dont know", and answer to me again.

Absolutely I would, in a heartbeat.  Same thing if I see someone drop a $20 bill on the street - I'd pick it up, run after them, and give it back.

I hope you don't ever run a business, because you'll run it into the ground with an attitude like that.

Honestly, I wanted to feel sorry for you for having your info plastered all over the internet, but after these statements you have made, trying to justify your theft, you're only showing yourself to be a lowlife scumbag.  You're part of the reason the world isn't a better place.  It is not your money, yet you've decided to keep it anyway.  If someone robbed a bank, then shoved a portion of the loot into your arms on the way out, would you keep it?  It is not your money, yet you keep it anyway, and try to justify your conscience with your queries of "be honest, would you return the money?"

Scumbag.

[CharlieContent]

Yes you would 've, stop lying.

the only imature amateur on here i see on here.. so far .. is you.

Haha how would you possibly know? You don't know me, you've never met me, and you have no idea about the state of my bank account.

What is your first language Rob?

[mccorvic]

All you who say you would return back the money i simply cant believe you. Replace that "somene" with "someone you dont know", and answer to me again.

Absolutely I would, in a heartbeat.  Same thing if I see someone drop a $20 bill on the street - I'd pick it up, run after them, and give it back.

I hope you don't ever run a business, because you'll run it into the ground with an attitude like that.

Honestly, I wanted to feel sorry for you for having your info plastered all over the internet, but after these statements you have made, trying to justify your theft, you're only showing yourself to be a lowlife scumbag.  You're part of the reason the world isn't a better place.  It is not your money, yet you've decided to keep it anyway.  If someone robbed a bank, then shoved a portion of the loot into your arms on the way out, would you keep it?  It is not your money, yet you keep it anyway, and try to justify your conscience with your queries of "be honest, would you return the money?"

Scumbag.

I just want to say that SgtSpike is probably my favorite person on this forum now.

And holy crap, nethead, you are a terrible human being and I'm glad to see that you have practically admitted to being a thief.  Thanks for proving us all right.

Anyways, for anyone wondering: Yesterday afternoon I started an order at bitcoinstore.com (my first from there) and the item I purchased was significantly cheaper than newegg.com even AFTER shipping costs. The turn around on the order was so fast that I'll be getting my item before Christmas even though I wasn't even planning on it.

I want to thank Charlie"axe to grind"Content for trying to spread FUD because otherwise I probably wouldn't have ordered from bitcoinstore.com

[gusti]

All you who say you would return back the money i simply cant believe you. Replace that "somene" with "someone you dont know", and answer to me again.

Absolutely I would, in a heartbeat.  Same thing if I see someone drop a $20 bill on the street - I'd pick it up, run after them, and give it back.

I hope you don't ever run a business, because you'll run it into the ground with an attitude like that.

Honestly, I wanted to feel sorry for you for having your info plastered all over the internet, but after these statements you have made, trying to justify your theft, you're only showing yourself to be a lowlife scumbag.  You're part of the reason the world isn't a better place.  It is not your money, yet you've decided to keep it anyway.  If someone robbed a bank, then shoved a portion of the loot into your arms on the way out, would you keep it?  It is not your money, yet you keep it anyway, and try to justify your conscience with your queries of "be honest, would you return the money?"

Scumbag.

Well said.

[Rassah]

After reading those, i want EVERYONE here to reply to:

If someone did a mistake and added to your real bank account even 1$, i say it again BY MISTAKE, would you give it back? Tell the truth here.

Yes. I have, in fact, returned from my car to the store to return a few bucks that they gave me in change by accident on a few occasions. First, it's not money that I am taking from some nebulous "business," it's someone's salary, bonus, or retirement income (if their retirement is in stocks). It's taking money from real, actual people (and not the rich CEOs, since they would just write off the loss and pass it on to soqmeone else, it not affecting their own salary). And second,  I see no reason to ruin relationships with places I plan to use and shop from again.  I doubt BitcoinStore will do business with nethead again, and now that it's public, some other places may deny him service as well (though doubtful). I have way more to lose from lack of access to goods and services than the store has from losing one customer.

That said, lessons were quite thoroughly learned by everyone involved, issues were fixed, and the initial dispute settled, so.... Yay?

[CharlieContent]

I want to thank Charlie"axe to grind"Content for trying to spread FUD because otherwise I probably wouldn't have ordered from bitcoinstore.com

Haha "FUD". Hey, I'm glad you got a good deal man.

[nybble41]

If someone did a mistake and added to your real bank account even 1$, i say it again BY MISTAKE, would you give it back? Tell the truth here.

If they asked nicely, and had reasonable evidence that the money came from them in the first place and was transferred by mistake, then I would probably return it. However, the odds go down significantly if they lack evidence, and become negligible if they start making demands. So far as I'm concerned, the money was given to me freely, and accepted in good faith; I did not request the money or do anything to cause the transfer. In the absence of a formal contract, it's up to me whether I choose to give it back. The analogy of finding cash on the sidewalk fails because it was only dropped, not given to you. This is more like someone walking up to you and handing you $50 with no explanation, and then later demanding it back, claiming a case of mistaken identity.

Note that this is consistent with postal rules, at least in the U.S.; if someone sends you a package, unsolicited, it's yours, and they have no right to demand that you return it or pay for it after the fact.

This goes doubly true for Bitcoin, where ownership is defined exclusively by possession of the controlling private key. It's up to the sender to make sure they're transferring their money to the right account. Returning money mistakenly sent to one of your accounts is nice, and maybe even the "right" thing to do, but I see no obligation here. They sent it to you, ergo it's yours. Intent is irrelevant. Don't sign or broadcast transactions you don't want processed.

My recommended mitigation for this would be to require your customers to agree to return excess funds on request as part of setting up an account. Then there would be an obligation, though you would obviously need to prove that the address belongs to someone who has an account with you and agreed to those terms. If you mistakenly send funds to some random third party, that's your problem, not theirs.

[Rob E]

Yes you would 've, stop lying.

the only imature amateur on here i see on here.. so far .. is you.

Haha how would you possibly know? You don't know me, you've never met me, and you have no idea about the state of my bank account.

What is your first language Rob?

oh but it is okay to make an accusation of someone YOU HAVE  never met. What an Idiot you are .. ... .. wauw.

This guy is really dumb.. ..

[SgtSpike]

If someone did a mistake and added to your real bank account even 1$, i say it again BY MISTAKE, would you give it back? Tell the truth here.

If they asked nicely, and had reasonable evidence that the money came from them in the first place and was transferred by mistake, then I would probably return it. However, the odds go down significantly if they lack evidence, and become negligible if they start making demands. So far as I'm concerned, the money was given to me freely, and accepted in good faith; I did not request the money or do anything to cause the transfer. In the absence of a formal contract, it's up to me whether I choose to give it back. The analogy of finding cash on the sidewalk fails because it was only dropped, not given to you. This is more like someone walking up to you and handing you $50 with no explanation, and then later demanding it back, claiming a case of mistaken identity.

Note that this is consistent with postal rules, at least in the U.S.; if someone sends you a package, unsolicited, it's yours, and they have no right to demand that you return it or pay for it after the fact.

This goes doubly true for Bitcoin, where ownership is defined exclusively by possession of the controlling private key. It's up to the sender to make sure they're transferring their money to the right account. Returning money mistakenly sent to one of your accounts is nice, and maybe even the "right" thing to do, but I see no obligation here. They sent it to you, ergo it's yours. Intent is irrelevant. Don't sign or broadcast transactions you don't want processed.

My recommended mitigation for this would be to require your customers to agree to return excess funds on request as part of setting up an account. Then there would be an obligation, though you would obviously need to prove that the address belongs to someone who has an account with you and agreed to those terms. If you mistakenly send funds to some random third party, that's your problem, not theirs.

I think the analogy of someone handing you $50 is off - that is a deliberate and purposeful action, whereas dropping some money on the ground or sending it to the wrong (with nothing identifying) account number is not.  Seeing a person face-to-face, you can be much more certain right from the get-go that it is going to the right place.  Sending money to a Bitcoin address or other account number without any other identification attached is a much easier mistake to make.  Therefore, I would revise your analogy to accidentally sending money to the wrong bank account (maybe dyslexia caused two numbers to be transposed).  If you knew who it was that you accidentally send the money to, would you not request the money back?  Would it not be their moral responsibility to send it back?  Or, similarly, if the bank accidentally deposited $100,000 in your bank account, would they take it back?  (Most certainly, they would, once the mistake was realized, as it was their money, not yours).

I think we're beyond laws here - I don't think anyone is arguing that any laws would apply here.  It's more of an argument of ethics and morality.

[CharlieContent]

oh but it is okay to make an accusation of someone YOU HAVE  never met. What an Idiot you are .. ... .. wauw.

This guy is really dumb.. ..

You didn't do too well at school did you? Maybe formal education just isn't for you. Have you considered picking up a book to help you out? I think this one could help you express yourself in a more coherent way, and also help you understand others. I really think it would make your life a little easier, and then you wouldn't have to get frustrated and angry like this.



All the best Rob! Good luck!

Charlie

[nybble41]

I think the analogy of someone handing you $50 is off - that is a deliberate and purposeful action, whereas dropping some money on the ground or sending it to the wrong (with nothing identifying) account number is not.  Seeing a person face-to-face, you can be much more certain right from the get-go that it is going to the right place.  Sending money to a Bitcoin address or other account number without any other identification attached is a much easier mistake to make.

The certainty you associate with face-to-face delivery only exists if the two people know each other by sight, and is subject to exceptions--identical twins, for example, or simply people who look very much alike. If you sent someone out with money to be delivered, and gave them the wrong address or showed them a picture of the wrong person to deliver to, the situation would be very much the same.

If you knew who it was that you accidentally send the money to, would you not request the money back?

Certainly I would request it back. However, that would be an appeal to their good nature, not the assertion of a right.

Would it not be their moral responsibility to send it back?

Moral responsibility is a personal issue, and for them to decide. Ethically, I would say that there is no justification for taking any of their property in compensation; that would be an escalation of force. If they ever erroneously send their property to you, however, you can feel free to hold on to it. Turnabout is fair play, after all.

Bitcoins are a bit of a special case, not being property to begin with. Keeping their actual nature in mind, they have no physical location and are not in anyone's possession; neither are they some sort of contractual claim, like a bank account balance. A balance in a Bitcoin account is nothing more or less than an informal agreement among most Bitcoin users that the holder of a certain private key has a certain number of bitcoins--an entirely virtual unit of account. Claiming that the bitcoins still belong to you after broadcasting a valid, signed transaction transferring them to another user's private key runs contrary to the nature of the system, and undermines its design.

Or, similarly, if the bank accidentally deposited $100,000 in your bank account, would they take it back?  (Most certainly, they would, once the mistake was realized, as it was their money, not yours).

There are some differences here. One is that you're talking about whether the bank would take the money back, not whether they should, or whether they have the right to do so. Certainly they have the power to reverse the change, as the manager of your account. Bitcoin transfers are somewhat more permanent by design, and the block chain and private keys are supposed to be an authoritative record of ownership.

The second difference is that your relationship with the bank is governed by a contract, and such contracts typically include a clause nullifying transfers or changes resulting from human error. In other words, when you set up the account you agreed to return the money if they could show that it was given to you in error. A similar clause could be inserted into the standard account agreement for Bitcoin merchants, but it would naturally only apply to their customers, not anyone who happens to receive bitcoins from them. There are no central organizations governing Bitcoin accounts to enforce such terms among all Bitcoin users.

I think we're beyond laws here - I don't think anyone is arguing that any laws would apply here.  It's more of an argument of ethics and morality.

Agreed.

[casascius]

I think we're beyond laws here - I don't think anyone is arguing that any laws would apply here.  It's more of an argument of ethics and morality.

I actually believe laws do apply, and to the extent they can't be applied, it's only because a) the person keeping the bitcoins is not in the US, b) it's not practical to pursue a claim of that nature for $50, and c) the legal system has a scarce understanding of bitcoins.

In United States v. HELMS No. 96-1167 Crim. App. No. 31250 the appeals court issued this opinion:

"The mistaken delivery of property to an individual who realizes the mistake and simultaneously forms the intent to steal the property at the moment of receipt constitutes larceny at common law. W. LaFave & A. Scott, 2 Substantive Criminal Law § 8.2(g) at 342-43 (1986). Furthermore, where the individual does not realize the mistake at the time of receipt but realizes it later and then forms the requisite intent, there is a larceny as well." http://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/opinions/1996Term/96-1167.htm

This of course assumes Bitcoins are recognized as property and that submission of a transaction to the block chain to be recognized as equivalent to "sending" them, concepts which I am sure will eventually be argued over and then found to be as I've defined them.

[Rob E]

oh but it is okay to make an accusation of someone YOU HAVE  never met. What an Idiot you are .. ... .. wauw.

This guy is really dumb.. ..

You didn't do too well at school did you? Maybe formal education just isn't for you. Have you considered picking up a book to help you out? I think this one could help you express yourself in a more coherent way, and also help you understand others. I really think it would make your life a little easier, and then you wouldn't have to get frustrated and angry like this.



All the best Rob! Good luck!

Charlie

 Like i said when you accuse somebody of something it is okay but when somebody accuses you of the same things you accuse somebody else of its " how do you know.  you never met me" This asinine kind of reasoning is just too silly to even go into No doubt many people can see it except CHarlie content himself. . But you know this double standard he shows asserts my earlier statement: He would have done the EXACT same thing if he'd  been in that position. . The guy is SUpEr Hypocritical .. And no doubt very immature and amateuristic  ARntja charley XD

And now he tries to win the argument by throwing it over my english mishaps.. lol.

Here's one for you charlie. >
cause i could do this for daa  y s ..   lo l..

[Rob E]

Actualy come to think of it when an opponent has nothing of substance to think  or say in a " argument" he ALWAYS attacts the spelling or english. or what ever language. . it's just weak. 
 guess that makes me the winner  yYyee e a aa h h .

[mccorvic]

Actualy come to think of it when an opponent has nothing of substance to think  or say in a " argument" he ALWAYS attacts the spelling or english. or what ever language. . it's just weak. 
 guess that makes me the winner  yYyee e a aa h h .

I have a hard time following Rob's posts most of the time, but I really enjoyed this one. 

 yYyee e a aa h h !

[CharlieContent]

Actualy come to think of it when an opponent has nothing of substance to think  or say in a " argument" he ALWAYS attacts the spelling or english. or what ever language. . it's just weak. 
 guess that makes me the winner  yYyee e a aa h h .

The reason that I drew attention to your (lack of) communication skills is because you are incoherent. I couldn't even understand your point, and to be honest I still can't. There's not much point in a debate when the other person writes so poorly that you don't even know what they are trying to say.

But, if you need to be the winner Rob, congratulations, you're the winner!

The sweet taste of victory, huh? I'm glad I could help you out with that, and I wish you and your family all the best this Christmas.

[SgtSpike]

I think we're beyond laws here - I don't think anyone is arguing that any laws would apply here.  It's more of an argument of ethics and morality.

I actually believe laws do apply, and to the extent they can't be applied, it's only because a) the person keeping the bitcoins is not in the US, b) it's not practical to pursue a claim of that nature for $50, and c) the legal system has a scarce understanding of bitcoins.

In United States v. HELMS No. 96-1167 Crim. App. No. 31250 the appeals court issued this opinion:

"The mistaken delivery of property to an individual who realizes the mistake and simultaneously forms the intent to steal the property at the moment of receipt constitutes larceny at common law. W. LaFave & A. Scott, 2 Substantive Criminal Law § 8.2(g) at 342-43 (1986). Furthermore, where the individual does not realize the mistake at the time of receipt but realizes it later and then forms the requisite intent, there is a larceny as well." http://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/opinions/1996Term/96-1167.htm

This of course assumes Bitcoins are recognized as property and that submission of a transaction to the block chain to be recognized as equivalent to "sending" them, concepts which I am sure will eventually be argued over and then found to be as I've defined them.

Oooh, interesting.  I would say that the law does indeed apply here then!